Tool surface texturing by shot peening: initial results and lessons learned

  1. de Argandoña, Eneko Sáenz 1
  2. Mendez, Markel 1
  3. Mendiguren, Joseba 1
  4. Zabala, Alaitz 1
  1. 1 Mondragon Unibertsitatea, Faculty of Engineering, Mechanics and Industrial Production, Loramendi 4, Mondragon 20500, Gipuzkoa, Spain
Proceedings:
IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

ISSN: 1757-8981,  1757-899X

Year of publication: 2024

Volume: 1307

Issue: 1

Pages: 012017

Type: Conference paper

DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/1307/1/012017 GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

Abstract

Abrasive and adhesive wear is a major issue in sheet metal forming processes. Although different solutions exist to reduce its impact, there is still room for progress. Surface texturing presents a big potential for tribological behaviour improvement by introducing oil retention voids on the surface. However, the economic efficiency of the surface functionalization is paramount for its implementation in industrial processes. In the present study, a widely known technology, shot peening, is applied for the creation of the voids. A grinding+polishing process is then applied to ensure a flat load bearing area. The textures are generated in 1.2379 tool steel blocks hardened at 60 HRc that emulate the tool. Different shot peening strategies are evaluated by carrying out strip drawing tests with AA5754H111 aluminium alloy sheets. Contact pressures up to 25 MPa are applied and the adhesive wear reduction potential is evaluated. First results point out the potential of this solution although the applied shot peening strategy needs to be carefully defined.

Bibliographic References

  • Godi, (2015), CIRP J Manuf Sci Technology, 11, pp. 28, 10.1016/j.cirpj.2015.06.001
  • Velkavrh, (2017), Tribology International, 114, pp. 418, 10.1016/j.triboint.2017.04.052
  • Wang, (2023), Tribology International, 177
  • Bech, (1998), CIRP Annals, 74, pp. 221, 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)62822-4
  • Sulaiman, (2017), Procedia Engineering, 207, pp. 2263, 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.10.992
  • Costa, (2009), J. Mater Process Technol, 209, pp. 1175, 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.03.026
  • Vorholt, (2017), Procedia Engineering, 207, pp. 2209, 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.10.983
  • Saeidi, (2015), Wear, 348–349, pp. 17
  • Hazrati, (2018), IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng., 418, 10.1088/1757-899X/418/1/012095